08-12-2003 16:50									#91
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by shawnmmcc "Starship Troopers" would be my example of a script, that while actually drawing dialogue and scenes largely from the book, totally subverts and perverts the intent of the book's author. Heinlein must be rolling in his grave. I don't mind the movie, I just mind the perversion of the original story under the same name. False pretenses.

Shawn, here is a link to a lenghty analysis of both the book and the movie by a person who liked the book but hated the movie. He states that Verhoeven did not read the book before he made the movie and changed it in critical ways, which he lists. Here is one clip,

"[N]ot only is Paul Verhoeven's Starship Troopers a terrible rendition of Heinlein's book, it has a lot of problems as a movie itself.

First, if Paul Verhoeven learned anything during his stint in the Dutch marines, exposure to Hollywood has since leached it from his mind. Verhoeven et al decided to leave out the powered armor, turning the MI into a fairly conventional force, recognizable to any member of today's armed forces -- except of, course, for the complete lack of artillery, mechanized transport, armored fighting vehicles, squad-level automatic weapons and indirect fire weapons such as mortars, other squad-level support systems, or combat medical units. Tactics consist of running towards the enemy in a big mob, running away from the enemy in a big mob, and walking from point A to point B in a big mob. (I especially like the scene where the MIs form a big circle around a Bug, with fellow troopers in their line of fire, and shoot at the Bug in the center -- I guess they are not as picky about friendly fire casualties in the 22nd century.) A supposedly elite unit, the MIs would have a hard time defeating a unit of Campfire Girls, let alone the Bugs."

http://www.kentaurus.com/troopers.htm#book

	08-12-2003 18:09									#92
	Inflate your Upload Space

Tattila the Hun (and a few others) brought up the two films I wanted to add, Cross of Iron and Stalingrad. Also a gold star to the finns for a number of good films (and to Väniö Linna for one of the best war books).

There has been a few great war films after all. Too bad that a lot of them often turns into conventional action films or gets and ideological or patriotic undertone that destroys them. A number of others (over-) use stereotypes in ways that can be quite disturbing, The bridge on the river Kwai for example.

	08-12-2003 19:30									#93
	Remove this text

It looks like we all value war films for different reasons. Some like the movies for their realistic protrayal of combat. Others like strong stories, acting or plot. Still others like their movies to be based on true events and to be somewhat historically accurate.

It also makes quite a difference if the movie is told from the viewpoint of a general (Patton) or from the viewpoint of a grunt (Platoon). The latter kind of movie typically will show the bonding of a group of men sharing combat. On the whole, this kind of movie tends to be very emotional. (The new Last Samurai movie is very much like this.)

There is a movie, I can't think of its name now, that show a unit in combat with the Germans during WWII. It focuses on a sergeant who at one point leads a squad to take out some German 88's. When they arrive behind the 88's, one of the soldiers with a flamethrower chickens out and runs. The sergeant shoots him in the back as he flees.

Does anyone know the name of this movie?